Planning sovereignty – Mayor is throwing in the towel – District of Munich

Directly opposite the entrance to the Unterhachinger open-air pool there is a large, almost undeveloped property, only on the edge there is a single-family house. Such areas are rare in Unterhaching and therefore arouse desires. Now the owner wants to build 22 apartments here. The alarm bells are ringing at Mayor Wolfgang Panzer (SPD). He has declared the topic to be a top priority, because he sees the operation of the outdoor pool at risk. With a development plan, he wants to quickly pull the emergency brake. The building committee paved the way for this on Tuesday evening.

Anyone who has streamed into the Unterhaching outdoor pool with all the other bathers on a beautiful summer’s day knows the masses pushing their way through the entrance on Schrenkstrasse. 7000 people are sometimes, if not Corona limits the number of tickets. If such a residential building project should be realized directly on this small street, as it could apparently be approved by the district office based on the development plan for the Grünau from 1964, the mayor is expecting a chaos in this area that is hardly manageable. Because 22 apartments would also mean 50 parking spaces. “That’s a lot of traffic, the swimming pool entrance would no longer be usable,” said Panzer at the meeting of the building committee. “I see a need for action, here is a development in the rolling, we have to do something,” he asked the council members to agree to intervene with a development plan.

Since the municipality has the planning authority, but not the authorization authority, Panzer suggests setting a common area for the use of the property. This would mean that residential development would be off the table for now. Then the municipality would have the reins of action in hand, emphasized the mayor. Because strangely enough, there is currently building law next to the existing house, i.e. in the area towards Hachinger Bach, which is considered a floodplain. “I cannot understand what the planning idea was for 60 years,” said Panzer. Especially since he fears that the surrounding houses could also be affected if such a development were implemented on this property in the flood plain. “We already have residential complexes in which basements are flooded,” warned the mayor.

In addition to his SPD parliamentary group, Panzer immediately had the FDP and the Free Voters by his side. “I also see it very critically,” jumped Gertraud Schubert (Free Voters) to the side of the mayor. In addition to the flood problem, she feared that people would move in there who complained about the noise of the swimming pool. The lounging areas in the bathroom are now too small. If the property remains vacant, the municipality would also have the opportunity to enlarge the outdoor pool at some point and redesign the entrance.

The mayor’s deliberations have not yet progressed that far, at least in public. With the consent of the local council, he wants to make common use areas out of the property next Wednesday, then one will see further. “We can change that again,” he asked for approval. The Greens, who initially reacted a little hesitantly because they did not feel well informed, were ultimately also in favor of drawing up a development plan. Only the CSU stuck to their no. “This is a massive encroachment on the property rights of the citizen who owns the property,” says Franz Felzmann. The municipality must speak to the owner before making such a decision. It doesn’t have to, thinks Panzer. Because: If the land is worth less due to the land-use planning, the municipality must compensate for the loss.

.
source site